What Does Judaism Think

The transfer of authority from Aaron as high priest to his son Elazar involve a miracle. The symbol of the transfer was the giving to Elazar of the priestly garments. Normally, when a person gives his clothing to another, he takes off the outer garments and then the inner garments. The other fellow waits to put on the inner garments and then the outer garments. But in this case, Elazar put them on in reverse order. Everything that Aaron took off, Elazar immediately put on. Thus, it would seem he was wearing the undergarments on the outside!

And so a miracle occurred, and when Elazar emerged from the cave where Aaron was to die, the clothing reversed itself. Many commentators question the need for this miracle. Why not let Elazar wait a few more seconds to put the clothing on in the proper order?

One answer I saw was quite satisfying. This was done to stress the importance of continual tradition. There should not even be a moment's break. Somebody must be wearing the garments of the high priest at every second. Tradition must be embraced with energy and vigor, not in a lackluster fashion. It would not be appropriate for Elazar to sit around waiting, he must eagerly grab the vestments of the high priest in order to keep the tradition continuous.

We can learn a lot from babies. A young child may become attached to a doll or a blanket. I warn you, do not try and take that doll or blanket away! You will see how powerful the toddler can become. Especially when bringing the child to a new framework, day care or a nursery, it is important that the child bring the doll or blanket with them. This is call they "transitional object." It provides a tremendous sense of security, and allows the child to move with confidence into unfamiliar surroundings.

This is the role of tradition. The traditions may be as seemingly unimportant as a recipe for Haroset on Passover, or as central as how you pronounce the Hebrew prayers. In any case, connecting to the tradition of your fathers and grandfathers creates a tremendous sense of security. This is, after all, who we are. Tradition may even supersede a better halakhic practice. Case in point:

Rabbi Joseph Soloveitchik once gave a detailed explanation as to why it is halachically preferable to sit down during the Kiddush prayer on Sabbath. Some have the custom of standing for that prayer, and Rabbi Soloveitchik felt that this was not the proper opinion.

The next Sabbath, the rabbi was staying in the Yeshiva. At the Friday night table, he recited the Kiddush standing up. His students came to him completely puzzled. Didn't the rabbi just tell them a few days before that it is better to sit for the Kiddush? "What can I do," responded Rabbi Soloveitchik, "this is the tradition of my fathers."

Now, mind you, standing or sitting for Kiddush is not a violation of Halakha. Nobody can say that they have a tradition to violate the Sabbath! But when faced with a question of a better halakhic practice or a tradition, tradition wins. This is because tradition connects us to Mount Sinai. Tradition connects us to the Jewish people in the Jewish faith. Tradition is the security blanket that lets us go boldly into a changing world, remaining ever young.

I think there is another significance to the reversed transferal of garments. At some point, the baby out grows the blanket. Does this mean that tradition is only important when a person is young? Not at all. What it means is that the tradition becomes internalized. The baby is no longer holding the blanket, because the blanket has become part of the baby's person.

There are two parts of a tradition. The external part is the physical action of the tradition, the preparing of the food, the performance of the ritual. The internal part is the security and connection to Judaism that the tradition brings. I believe that the outer garments of the High Priest represents the physical fulfillment of the traditions. The inner garments represent the emotional and spiritual connections.

At first, Aaron gives over the outer garments, the external symbols of tradition. Elazar grasps these and brings them to his flesh. Then he receives the inner garments, the emotional and spiritual dimension of tradition. These do not immediately touch his flesh, they remain outside of him. But as he continues to fulfill the physical elements of tradition, the emotional connection grows and comes closer to his flesh. Finally, he is wearing the clothes in order.

And once he has the external clothing on the outside, they become available to everyone else with whom he has contact. He thus continues to influence others to embrace the physical traditions of Judaism, which will, with time, become part of their person.

A responsible parent knows the time to pamper, and the time to step back. They know when the baby needs the blanket, and when to allow the child to proceed without it.

The children of Israel required water. After 40 years in the desert, they were getting close to the point of entering the Promised Land. When there well ran dry, they complained, and God told Moses and Aaron speak to the rock "and it shall give forth water." Moses, however, did not speak to the rock, but rather hit it with his stick. God immediately punished him by decreeing that he would not enter the Land with the people. What did he do that was so terrible, especially if it worked?

Years before, when the Israelites had just left Egypt, there was a similar need for water and a similar mini rebellion. At that time, Moses was commanded to hit the rock in order to bring forth the water. So Moses simply repeated what he had done successfully a generation before. So terrible?

Yes, because it was the equivalent of forcing the grown child to take his security blanket with him. When the Israelites were new, they needed to be taken care of. They had just emerged from slavery, and were easily frightened and insecure. They were putting on new traditions, but still lacks the internal connections and security they needed. So when they needed water, Moses achieved it from a top-down perspective. He hit the rock, and the rock obeyed.

Similarly, when the Israelites were attacked by the Amalekites, it was God who commanded Moses to put Joshua in command and to stand on the high place raising his arms. Again, a top-down response to a challenge. Moses and Joshua lead, the people follow.

But now, a new generation has already grown up, and their underwear is on the inside. They have internalized the blanket, they are secure and connected. All Moses needed to do was to speak to the rock, to show it respect and allow it to bring forth the water on its own. And, similarly, after Aaron passes on, the Israelites are attacked by Canaanites. This time, however, Moses and Joshua are not even mentioned in the fight. Instead, the Israelites themselves swear to destroy their enemy. They have, indeed, grown up and changed. Moses no longer needs to hold their hand, no longer is needed to be their leader.

And this is the historical process of the Jewish people. The peak of prophecy was Moses, but throughout the generations it declined. At one point, prophecy stopped altogether. That's not because the people were bad, it's because the people were growing up.

We have a responsibility to keep our traditions alive, and to keep our faith the young and vibrant. By embracing the physical traditions, the foods, the melodies, the special ways to fulfill the commandments, we start the process by which are inner security and connection becomes stronger. By embracing the old, we become renewed.

Our generations may look different, and may inhabit different worlds, but we must be grounded by tradition. Then we will be able to go forth into unfamiliar surroundings and find the proper way to continue fixing the world.

In the book of Numbers, the people of Israel are poised to enter The Holy Land. In order to best prepare to conquer the land, they request that Moses, the leader, send some spies in advance. Moses is pleased that the people are preparing to take possession of their homeland, and agrees to the people's request.

The result is a tragedy. 10 of the 12 spies bring back a devastating report, frightening the people into giving up on their dream of The Land of Israel. "We saw giants there, and we were like little bugs in their eyes. We cannot conquer the land." Only two of the spies, Caleb and Joshua, tried to change the people's fears into optimism. Based on the commentary of Rashi, here is what they said:

"Is that all that Moses has done for us? Did he not split the sea as we left Egypt? Was he not God's messenger and assistant, helping us get the manna in the wilderness? We can certainly conquer the land, and even if Moses told us to go at the moon, we could do it!"

It didn't work. The people sat down to cry, and that date became a day of national mourning -- the ninth of Av, the date of the destruction of both Holy Temples in Jerusalem. God decreed that that entire generation should pass on in the desert, and only their children would enter the Holy Land. Until then, 40 years down the line, the Israelites would wander in the desert.

It's among the most difficult stories in the Bible, both emotionally, and intellectually. After all, Joshua and Caleb were right! If Moses, acting as God's chosen messenger, was able to split the sea, why should the Israelites be afraid of large Canaanites? Egypt was the dominant empire of the age, and they proved no match for the children of Israel and their God. Why the fear?

Playing devil's advocate, I will also ask why the extreme punishment? Why 40 years wandering, and why give a dark legacy to the ninth of Av? After all, the people were in a panic! It wasn't a premeditated sin like the Golden Calf! When a person hears that is going to be attacked by giants, it is reasonable for him to be afraid, is it not?

The answer is, if you are the Jewish people, it is not reasonable to be afraid. Being brave, taking action despite the seeming impossibility of the mission is the very essence of the children of Israel. Without it, their national purpose will never be achieved. Israel is compared to a lone sheep amongst 70 wolves. The situation seems impossible, but it is exactly what is required. The most destructive emotion to a person's sense of mission is the emotion of fear. And often quoted Hasidic rabbi said, "All the world is a narrow bridge, and the main thing is never to fear!"

Fear bypasses logic. Panic causes a terrible mistakes. We love watching superheroes function with tremendous calm in situations of tremendous stress and danger. Deep inside our hearts, we yearn to have that courage and be heroes. God created each and everyone of us to be a hero, to not be afraid of changing our lives and our world. Think about the fighters in the Warsaw ghetto. They held off the overwhelmingly powerful German army, with small arms and guerrilla tactics alone, for nearly a month! That small band of starved Jewish fighters kept the Germans on the field longer than the entire Polish army had at the beginning of the war.

That's heroism, and that is the definition of the people of Israel. We must be a nation of heroes. The symbol of our mission was the Holy Temple, the place where Heaven and Earth met. What happens there? The spiritual perfection of Heaven enters the physical and imperfect world. It then elevates all who come in contact with this Divine Heavenly Presence. The spirit is always more powerful than the body. That is the core of our belief.

If you do not believe that the spirit is more powerful, then the presence of giants in the land of Canaan will indeed induce fear. And fear, as we have said, closes the heart to any reasoning. Moses's accomplishments notwithstanding, the people were afraid and would respond to no argument. Thus, they discarded the power of spirituality. Without that, they could never hope to accomplish their mission.

Great accomplishments come from asking a simple question: How to do it? Not "can it be done?" An attitude of "why not?" is the most can-do attitude, and shows tremendous spiritual power. So instead of suffering silent desperation, we should realize our tremendous mutual power to change, to make what our true essence demands of us come to be.

There is a fascinating discussion in the Talmud regarding the blessing that God gives when the people follow His Torah. "And I will cause the bad animals (i.e. dangerous ones) to cease from the land." Rabbi Yehuda opines that they will migrate elsewhere. Lions and tigers and bears (oh my) will relocate, and there will be no animals to fear in the Land of Israel. Rabbi Shimon, on the other hand, claims the animals will all remain, but cease to be dangerous, in the spirit of "The lion will lie down with the lamb."

Ramban endorses this view, and brings a number of supports. The main one is his claim that animals, by their very nature, are NOT carnivores at all. In the creation story, God says that he has given the animals the "grasses and vegetables" to eat. Only after the flood did it become permissible for humans to consume flesh. All creation, in its natural state, is vegetarian.

So what changed? Man. Man introduced violence into the world. Man cause a ripple in the peaceful fabric of life. Man corrupted the animals. Honi the Circle maker once encountered a venomous creature. Honi touched it, and it died. He explained to his amazed friends that, "It is sin that kills, not the animals." Man has a transformative power over nature, and this power is exercised by man's moral behavior.

What is the deeper meaning of this debate between Rabbi Yehuda and Rabbi Shimon? Why does one see the animals leaving, while the other sees them being transformed?

After the flood, man became permitted to eat meat. Why this change? Rabbi Dr. Avraham Twerski, in his book "Spirituality," questions why a person would hate someone they had never met or known. Why is there something called "Sin'at hinam," baseless hatred?

It is because of the subconscious. The subconscious functions with the assumption that the part equals the whole. Thus, if one aspect of a person triggers a negative response, e.g. someone I just met has the same family name as a bitter enemy, we immediately develop a subconscious dislike of that person. It isn't fair at all, but it is how we work. What is needed to be done is for the conscious to overrule the subconscious.

There is a technique called "sublimation." This means taking a bad urge and channeling it into an accepted activity. Someone with an inner hostility, for example, might be great at sports, rather than working as a hit man. In these cases, the subconscious continues to exist, but the conscious channels it in a healthier way.

That is why God allowed man to eat flesh, in order to sublimate his violent subconscious urges in a healthier way. In an ideal world, however, the subconscious is transformed. And as man goeth, so goeth the wild kingdom. Sublimation is important, but it is a compromise. It is not a transformation. That only comes when Israel becomes completely committed to God's Law and morality. Then, the world is truly transformed.

Thus, Rabbi Yehuda is dealing with the world as it is. The best we can hope for is sublimation, and thus the "bad" animals will have to leave. Rabbi Shimon sees a perfect world, and thus claims the animals will change, because man will change. We will all be as Honi the Circle Maker.

Rudy Giuliani, New York's famous mayor, stopped crime in many areas through a policy of "zero tolerance." He denied what his predecessor had done when there were the Crown Heights riots, namely, to let the rioters vent their anger for a couple of days. Rudy believed that such venting is not sublimation at all, but rather an invitation to bloodshed. Instead, zero tolerance teaches us an important lesson:

Sublimation is when you divert a bad urge to an acceptable expression. It is NOT allowing a little bit of bad behavior in the hopes it will prevent worse behavior. It is not a compromise in that sense, it is a redirection. You can launch a campaign, you can give speeches and work for justice, but you may not throw a single stone.

So with us. Even sublimation means to change the behavior, not to accept small quantities of it. If done well, sublimation can lead to transformation. That is the goal of Torah. We sublimate - the Torah allows something in every area of human drives - in order to eventually become transformed. We work towards rebuilding our subconscious to desire the true and the good.

There are many commandments in the Torah that show the power of time. For instance, the Biblical penalty for lighting a fire on the Day of Rest, the Sabbath, is quite severe. Yet, if you light a fire ONE SECOND after Shabbat is over, you are not only not committing a sin, you are probably doing a mitzva, a commandment, called Havdala, or seperating the Sabbath from the weekday.

Wow, one second! The one who brought a Thanksgiving offering to God in the Temple had to eat the meat from that sacrifice within that day. If he left it over, it was considered a sin. Think of it: same action, wrong time, equals sin! The only difference is the time.

That is because time is a PHYSICAL property. In fact, it is the most important ingredient in any action. Without time, nothing moves or happens. The world becomes a still-photo, or sculpture. In other words, everything is dead without time moving it.

But that is only half the story. The real power comes when we realize that time, like all other physical properties, has unique characteristics. Not all minutes are created equal. Some have more potential for certain actions, while other times are more propitious for other actions. King Solomon was being quite literal when he said, "There is a time for everything and an hour for every pursuit under heaven."

The Biblical commentator, Seforno, stresses that God seeks us to achieve perfection in all we do. Excess is not perfection, neither is insufficiency. Time is the most important ingredient in perfection, to know how to use time to its utmost. When one brings a Thanksgiving offering, he colors the time with the potential for closeness to God. Failing to complete that process, waiting to finish consuming the sacrifice, destroys perfection and is a sin.

The Sabbath is a time that is unique in its power for spiritual renewal. Performing weekday labors on it and profaning the day constitute the destruction of potential for perfection, and are a great sin.

And the opposite is true. Using time spiritually, seizing the moment and integrating our lives with it lets us taste perfection again and again. The Jewish day, the Jewish week and the Jewish year are filled with minor and major occasions, showing us the color of time. By aligning our lives to that, we can harness the true secrets of effectiveness, spirituality and perfection.

The section of the Torah we read this week deals with the laws of leprosy. A person who develops a white patch on their skin, with white hair in it, Is considered impure, and must wait outside the camp until he is healed. If, however, the whiteness spreads all over their entire body, he is considered ritually pure. The commentaries jump up and down about this strange law! If, they reason, when only part of the leper's body has the white patches, is he considered impure, then when his entire body becomes white he should certainly be considered impure!

The famed Chofetz Chaim offers a powerful explanation. God sends a message to someone who needs to hear it. A person who has only partial leprosy may convince themselves that they are not so spiritually ill. After all, most of their body may be clean. Thus, they will not be motivated to repent. The Torah then requires them to be sent out of the camp pending an improvement. Being sent out of the camp, into solitary existence, forces introspection and repentance.

But when a person has reached the bottom, they don't require such messages to know that they must repent. Therefore, the person who becomes 100% leprous, will be in such a state of mind that they do not need to be sent to solitary. They have hit rock bottom, they know that it is either repent or die.

This helps me understand a very difficult concept in the world: the suffering of the righteous and the prospering of the evil. The rabbis explain that a suffering righteous person is not 100% righteous. (A righteous person who is prospering is, however, 100% righteous). On the other end, a prospering evildoer must be less than 100% evil.

This still seems illogical. Why should a mostly evil person have a far better existence than a mostly righteous person? Rather, our sages explain, this calculation is all in preparation for The World to Come, when all accounts are set straight. The mostly righteous person has some sins to expiate, and so God brings suffering upon him in this world, so that he will arrive unblemished at The World to Come. Conversely, the mostly evil person still has some good deeds to his credit. God rewards him in this world, so that he will pay for his evil actions in the afterlife.

If, however, we are dealing with people in the gray areas, where is the dividing line? I would speculate that it is in the person's heart, and in what contribution they make to humanity. A war criminal who helps his neighbors and is philanthropic should be shunned as a leper and punished for his crimes. A comedian who brings cheer and joy to millions, but cheats on their taxes and on their spouse, should be respected and loved for the good things he does, and censured (and prosecuted, if appropriate) for the crimes he commits.

There are many public figures who have contributed so much to the world, yet have personal flaws that have also hurt people. The laws of Lashon Hara teach us that telling something negative about another, even if it is true, is forbidden. Why? Because the person who hears such talk will judge the entire person based on that one negative aspect, and shun their humanity entirely. I believe that is wrong. Whether it be a political leader, brilliant film director or a legendary entertainer, we do not need to throw them out with their misdeeds. The great Rabbi Moses Feinstein was asked about a certain Rabbi who wrote music, yet behaved in seemingly inappropriate ways at times. Rabbi Feinstein responded that, "a melody does not become impure."

Such a person can, indeed, be considered a righteous person, albeit not 100%. We must be very careful before we throw out some of the wonderful people who have made our world a better place. Yes, some of their personal deeds may be disgusting and evil, and there is no tolerance for such actions. But, as King David says, "The sins shall perish from the earth, and they (the sinners) will be evil no longer."

So Israel is not perfect, but it is most certainly righteous. The incredible amount of goodness that Israel creates and contributes to the world is the proof. Does she occasionally pursue bad policies? Have there not been moments when Israelis have done shameful things? Certainly. You may disagree with our government policy at times, as most of us do, but you must cherish and love Israel, one of the greatest forces for good in the world.

Israel's national anthem, Hatikvah, was a song with plenty of controversy. It remains scrupulously secular, with no mention of God or the Divine Providence that helped bring our nation back to life. The composer was not a legendary poet, famous composer or spiritual leader.

Contrast that with the alternative national anthem, that lost by just one vote in the 1933 Zionist Congress, the Shir HaMaalot made famous by Cantor Yoselle Rosenblatt. Here was a song with words by none other than King David himself! And the melody, composed by a Cantor named Minkowsky and sang by the pious Cantor Rosenblatt, had every element of holiness you could ask for. It was the equivalent of a 100% righteous person.

And yet, Hatikvah won. Perhaps this was also Divine Providence, to encourage us to embrace the very human of us, and strengthen the good within us. Perhaps our focus should not be on worshiping those that are perfect, but helping perfect those that are not. Perhaps we need to stop judging, and start loving.

Many commentators on the Torah point out how the Tabernacle, the portable Sanctuary that preceded the Jerusalem Temple, contained within its very structure the Names of God. Without going into details, the numbers of curtains, of wall flats, the numerical values therein all point to the Divine Name.

I always wondered about the point of this. After all, if it is only implied by numerical values hidden in the amount of curtains, flats and their measurements, of what practical importance is it? If only the most learned are aware of those Names, how are they to impart a spiritual impact upon those who visit the Tabernacle? In other words, why bother?

My teacher, Rav Ahron Soloveichik, of blessed memory, explained how there are three names for the Tabernacle: 1. Sanctuary, 2. Tent of Testimony, 3. Tent of Meeting. The first refers more to the worship/sacrificial aspect of the Tabernacle. The second refers to the Torah education aspect of the Tabernacle, where the people would come to learn the Word of God. The third refers to the aspect of social support, where people would come together to help one another.

These parallel the three pillars upon which the world exists. These pillars, mentioned in the Mishna of Avot, are: 1. Torah, 2. Worship-sacrifice, and 3. Acts of Kindness. All three were embodied by the Tabernacle. It was where the Ark of the Covenant was, and where the court of the Sages sat. It was where the people worshiped and brought sacrifices, and it was where each individual was welcomed as part of the community.

In other words, the Temple was the place that brought completeness to the world, where the spiritual and the emotional were united in bonds of love to God and to mankind. It was, indeed, universal. "My House is a place for prayer for ALL the nations."

This, however, is not automatic. It depends on how the custodians of the Tabernacle and Temple, and in our days, the synagogues, fulfill their mission. They must make each House of the Lord a place of Torah, a place of prayer, and, perhaps most critically, a place of kindness. Rav Soloveichik points out the statement of Hillel the Elder, who said, "If I (i.e. the true me) am here, everything is here." A synagogue and a Temple must be dedicated to helping each person who enters uncover their true "I", their true self, potential and mission.

Who would not want to spend time in a place like that?

So I believe that the fact that God's Name was hidden away in the numerical values of the Tabernacle's elements was done so as to articulate this challenge to the custodians. The Name was not put up in Neon lights, because it is not automatic that the Divine Presence is in the Tabernacle. Yes, in Exodus it says "They shall make for me a Sanctuary and I shall dwell within their midst." The key word is Sanctuary, implying holiness. It is not sufficient to make a beautiful physical structure. It must be infused with holiness, with the three pillars of Torah, true worship and real kindness.

If the custodians are truly dedicated to sincere prayer, to teaching the true Torah and to each individual who enters as a holy person, then the Name of God becomes apparent in a deeply spiritual way. The people feel it inside their souls each and every time they enter. And when God's Name moves our spirit, it remains with us even after we leave. "I will dwell in their midst," even as they return to mundane life.

Each visit to the Sanctuary must transform our lives in the interim as well.

At first glance, the purpose of the Tabernacle and the wonder of the High Priest and his magnificent dress would seem to be to inspire people. It is certainly true that human beings are affected by things that are aesthetically pleasing. We create a positive association for that which looks good and sounds beautiful. Good-looking people are deemed more trustworthy and likable, even though there is no objective reason for it.

And so it is important for our Jewish communal institutions to create that good impression. And, yet, the purpose of the garments of the High Priest go way beyond simply making a good impression.

The centerpiece of his eight garment uniform was the Breastplate. In it, were 12 stones representing the 12 tribes of Israel. They were known as the "Urim Vetumim." This means that they "lit up and perfected." Indeed, these stones had a supernatural power to them. In the times of the first Temple, the King, when faced with major decisions of state, could consult the Urim Vetumin to gain Divine guidance. All of the letters of the Hebrew alphabet were on those stones, and upon being asked, the letters indicating the correct answer would light up miraculously.

This event would only happen when the High Priest wore the Breastplate. Only the combination of this holy individual with the holy adornment could bring that direct Divine communication.

Not every High Priest was worthy of it. Throughout the entire period of the Second Temple, the stones either were not present or did not function. The Talmud has uncomplimentary things to say about many of the High Priest in that period of time. Some of them were elitist, some refused to accept the principles of the Oral Law. The spiritual level of the High Priest seems to be critical to the functioning of the Urim Vetumin.

The commentaries all ask how it was possible for a High Priest in Second Temple times to fulfill his duties if there were no Urim Vetumim. The rule is that a High Priest who officiates without all of the required garments is liable to death at the hands of heaven! A couple of answers are offered. One is that the Breastplate was, indeed, there, just that the stones were not. Others disagree, and claim that the breastplate without the stones is as if it's nonexistent. Rather, they claim that the stones were there as well, but they no longer had the magical function.

This law of "mechusar begadim," or lacking required garments is explained by the commentaries in a striking way. The man who has been the High Priest but attempts to perform the Temple service without the garments is not, at that time, the High Priest. It is as if he is not even a Cohen, simply a regular individual who inserted themselves into the Temple ritual. About such a person the Torah says, "and the stranger that comes close (to perform the Service) shall die."

In other words, the clothing makes the man, or, in this case, the High Priest.

The Sefer Hachinuch, a later medieval scholar, provides a novel understanding of the role of these garments. Every single garment the High Priest wore had to cover his entire person. There was to be no significant flesh showing. In this way, the High Priest would see the symbols of holiness upon his entire person. In other words, the garments were not to impress and inspire the people coming into the Tabernacle, but rather to reminds the High Priest himself of his unlimited potential for holiness.

This is an inspiring concept. A human being who is in full perception of the innate holiness within himself is capable of becoming a conduit for direct communication from God. He wears upon his person, numerous times, the Divine Name. Such is the potential of the human being, created in the image of God.

What is even more inspiring is the fact that the first High Priest was Aaron. Why so? Because Aaron was a very human being. He had imperfections in his past, specifically the fact that he somehow facilitated the episode of the Golden Calf. Instead of being a disqualifier, perhaps that is the true reason he was the perfect person to be the first dedicated High Priest.

What is the role of the High Priest, anyway? To bring atonement and forgiveness to the people. There is no such thing as a completely perfect individual, but if there were, he would not be appropriate for this exalted position. He could not relate to the rest of the people who come to the Temple seeking redemption and cleansing. Nobody would feel any affinity for him, and thus his influence would not be effective.

Thus, we can resolve our doubt about the role of the Tabernacle and the splendiferous garments of the High Priest. They are not for the glory of God, but to show all of us the glory of God that resides in our own souls. The synagogue is not a cathedral where the faithful are made to feel very small, but rather it is a Tabernacle where the faithful reminded of just how great and holy they are.

The Temple and the synagogue are not places we go to discharge duties to God and then go home to our lives. They are places we go to stock up on spiritual self-esteem in order to bring that holiness with us out into the world and back into our homes. When we see a man, flawed as we are, who covers himself in holiness and reaches the level where God speaks through the Breastplate upon his person, we see what we are capable of achieving. And when the man treats us with love and honor, we are motivated to achieve that holiness.

The story of the 10 plagues has a comic relief: Pharaoh's magicians. This bunch of hapless sorcerers make four appearances during the 10 plagues. The first two, blood and frogs, they are able to replicate. This serves to harden Pharaoh's heart, as it diminishes the supernatural aspect of those plagues. Pharaoh is not impressed, since human magicians can do these things too.

The third plague, lice, marks a turning point. Bringing lice out of the dust of the earth proves to be too much for the magicians. They are unable to replicate it, and thus they proclaim, "It is the finger of God." (They make one more nonappearance in the story, at the plague of boils. There, we are told that they were unable to even stand in front of Pharaoh, as they were afflicted as well.)

Let's focus on lice. Two things puzzle me. First of all, the obvious question of why were the magicians unable to create lice, if they were able to replicate the first two plagues? What was so difficult? Secondly, the plague of lice was to be initiated by Aaron striking the dust. Why not Moses?

Rashi answers both questions. As for the magicians, Rashi tells us that their powers are limited to objects larger in size than a grain of barley. Since lice are smaller, the magicians were unable to influence them. And as for Aaron hitting the dirt in place of Moses, it was because of gratitude. The dirt of Egypt had saved Moses, as it concealed the Egyptian whom he had killed. Therefore, Moses had to demonstrate gratitude to the dirt by not being the one to strike it.

Both of Rashi's answers bring up new questions. Why can't the magicians function when their subject is smaller than a barley grain? What difference does it make? And why is Moses obligated to show sensitivity to dirt, an inanimate object without feelings?

Let's tackle the second question first. Jews cover the challah on Friday night while they make kiddush on a cup of wine. Do you know why they do that? It's because, in theory, challah could also have been used for kiddush, in place of wine. Since the wine is getting the honor, the challah might be embarrassed. So we cover it.

Now the same question applies! Challah is inanimate, it has no feelings. What are we protecting? My teacher, Rabbi Ahron Soloveichik, explained that we are protecting our own character. By showing sensitivity towards inanimate objects, we are training ourselves to show sensitivity to our fellow human beings. In other words, we are chiseling our character traits to the finest detail. We are expelling insensitivity from our souls, even as it relates to inanimate objects.

This is the reason why Moses could not strike the sand. It is because Judaism requires tremendous detail in the shaping of our character. Each word of the prayer service should be said carefully, each requirement of every mitzva should be fulfilled with great attention. Does God really care about that? Yes, he does, because it is through those details that become more and more spiritual. Spirituality is the ladder to reach and connect with God. And God really cares that we connect with Him!

I always wondered how glue worked. After all, two smooth surfaces should not be able to be connected to each other without a nail or screw. How does glue, a liquid that will dry just as flat as the surfaces, actually hold them together?

It's two things: the details and the large surface area. The seemingly flat surface is actually porous, and it is the nature of the glue to enter those pores and then clasp them. Secondly, unlike a nail or a screw which connect one or two points, glue must be spread out across the whole surface to be most effective. And thus, the verse "And you, who are glued to God your Lord are alive today!" takes on significant meaning. We are glued to God by the details of our mitzva observance and spirituality, and by our total commitment of our lives to these things. The details and the totality, together.

Impressionistic art notwithstanding, we are always moved by a beautiful portrait or scenic painting. The more detail, the more realistic the painting and the more we enjoy it. God created a world full of details, down to the smallest things. Ever sit and watch an ant doing its work? It's miniature, but it's beautiful and fascinating. The more spiritual, the more detailed and thorough.

The physical world, however, likes big. Hedonists always want more. Pharaoh's magicians came with the power of the physical world. And earthly magic requires earthly materials, not spiritual ones. The spiritual materials are minute, detailed. A physical magician has no power over spirituality. Thus, they couldn't manipulate lice or anything smaller than a certain size.

When a Jew observes the minutia with great care, he or she is climbing the ladder of spirituality and touching the gateway to heaven. The higher one climbs, the more careful their footing must be. God wants us to enjoy the full beauty of this world, a physical space where one must seek spirituality in the details, in the little things. "The rock [the Painter] creates perfect work…". God is the cosmic painter, painting in a level of detail that is the magnificent world we live in. By paying attention to details, we see more of God's glory and climb the ladder to spirituality.

So never be defensive if someone asks you if you think God really cares. Answer that He does, because He wants us to be spiritually powerful, and capable of appreciating the full incredible beauty of all of creation.

There are two main differences between this 10th plague and the nine that preceded it that I wish to focus on. First of all, in all of the other plagues, the Israelites were spared automatically. For this one, though, they are given explicit instructions as to what they must do to be spared. They have to prepare a sacrificial lamb, smear the blood on their door posts and lintels, and eat the sacrifice together with matza and bitter herbs. Further, they must eat it in a state of readiness to depart, with staff in hand.

The second difference is that this plague is preceded by a number of seemingly tangential commandments, especially the one about tefillin, or, phylacteries. These are small boxes containing chapters from the Torah that are tied onto the arm and the forehead during prayer services.

Why these differences? Why is it so critical for the Israelites to perform this sacrificial ritual, and what is the relevance of the commandment of tefillin?

God does not engage in punishment as vengeance. When there is divine punishment, it is didactic. It is to teach man to correct his ways. Jewish tradition teaches that God's punishments are "measure for measure," meaning that they directly address the sinful attitude of the transgressor. This is no more apparent than in the most famous of Biblical dictums on Justice: an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth, a leg for a leg, and so forth.

In many parts of the world, this principle is interpreted literally, and that is a tragedy. Jewish law states that what is required by this dictum is monetary compensation, not the amputation of the limb of the aggressor. Simple justice requires this understanding! Let's say, for example, that a singer cut off the hand of a pianist. Is justice served by cutting off the hand of the singer? The pianist has lost his livelihood, while the singer can continue unharmed! That is not justice.

But there is a more fundamental understanding of this dictum that we must learn. It is that punishment is not vengeance. Those who interpret this literally make a tragic mistake, understanding punishment as a form of doing to the aggressor what he did to the victim. He caused the victim great pain, so he should suffer accordingly. What this understanding says is that the past is what matters. A. caused B. to suffer in the immediate past, so he must suffer as well.

That is not what the Torah teaches. When we evaluate the monetary worth of the severed limb, and require the perpetrator to pay that, we are stressing two things. First of all, that the future is the most important element. The aggressor has denied the victim their capabilities for the future, and it is that which must be compensated. Secondly, it focuses the aggressor on what he has done to the victim. He must think of how he has changed that person's life. We have suddenly moved our focus from the perpetrator himself to the other, to the victim.

Now we can explain the plague of the firstborn in greater depth. Egypt was a completely self-absorbed nation. It was the home of all manner of sexual licentiousness, and a pagan belief system that elevated material possessions and wealth and power. It was a society that lived for pleasure, that lived for today. This goes in direct opposition to human nature.

Human nature is built upon planting trees, upon beautifying the world for others, for the future. Our spirit drives us to sacrifice our rest and sloth to go out and build something for posterity. For this, our children are not only recipients, but transmitters into the continuing future. We are not to teach them to pursue pleasure, we are to teach them to pursue responsibility and posterity.

The Egyptians taught their children something else. They taught them hedonism, materialism, pursuit of fleeting pleasures and possessions. God brought the 10th plague, the slaying of the firstborn, as a lesson to the Egyptians: by living your lives according to your false values, you have spiritually killed your own children.

We see in the world around us tragic examples of child destruction in a spiritual sense. How can we watch the Isis terrorists teaching young children to kill without our feeling deep sadness and revulsion? And if those children get killed in some future battle, who are the real killers? I would say the grown-ups who trained them to walk down that tragic path.

Thus, the Israelites must prepare for this plague as well by reaffirming their commitment to the future. They are to eat the Passover sacrifice in readiness to march, staff in hand. This entire ritual is to cause them to embrace the future, to commit to transmitting their spiritual heritage to their children, their children's children, and beyond, into eternity. By doing this, they save their firstborn spiritually, and they are spared the plague of the Egyptians.

What is the legacy they are to transmit? In one word, Torah. God's Word is the spiritual life of the universe. The tefillin, with the four chapters of Torah within them, must be tied upon our arms and our heads. They must guide our actions and our thoughts. They are the keys to the future, they are the keys to giving spiritual life to our children. The answers to all of life's mysteries and questions can be found in the Torah, but only by delving deep into its secrets. This commitment is what gives us life, and what gives us true meaning.

When Moses meets God at the burning bush, he asks Him a strange question: "When the Israelites asked me what is Your Name, what should I tell them?" God then responds, "I Shall Be that I Shall Be. Thus you shall tell the children of Israel, I Shall Be has sent me to you."

This is a strange kind of a name! Now, I wasn't expecting "Charlie", but I was expecting one of the Names of God that we frequently use. This is more of a statement of how God will continue to exist in the world, but it's not a name! God will be present, God will be existing. Is that actually a name?

The book of Exodus, in Hebrew, is called the book of Shemot, which means "names." It is the book of names, and it is full of them. The Rabbis of the Midrash teach us that a person has three names: 1. The name that God gives us. 2. The name that our parents give us. 3. The name that we give ourselves.

I believe this is teaching us a very significant lesson for life. The name that God gives us is not a name in the traditional sense. I believe it refers to the unique skills and gifts that God imbues each of his creations with. It is our talents and our abilities, our genetic makeup.

The name that our parents give us refers to our education and upbringing. Parents generally give a name to a child expressing their hopes and aspirations for that child. They will follow up the giving of the name with the years of education and teaching to help the child fulfill that name.

Finally, the name we give ourselves is the cumulative effect of the way we interact with the world. With this, we can understand the phenomenon of some of the Bible's names. For example, some of the kings involved in the first war, recorded in the book of Genesis, seem quite unusual. For example: Bera = in bad. Birsha = in evil. Shinav = hates his Father [in Heaven]. I highly doubt that these are the names that these kings were known by. These are the names that these men achieved for themselves, through their evil deeds. When the Torah tells us someone's name, more often than not it is the name expressing their character, not the name on their driver's license. It's the name he gave himself.

So it is with the Names of God. They are simply expressing how God relates to the world at that moment. God's message to the children of Israel, through His Name, is a very powerful one. "I Shall Be." In a world of evil and chaos, the people must know that God continues to exist, continues to be pure and good. They must believe that their bondage is only temporary. They must believe that the goodness of God can be, and will be, revealed. It was a message of encouragement that the Israelite salves badly needed.

The Rabbis in the Midrash claim that the Jews merited redemption from Egypt for having "not changed their names, their mode of dress, and their language." Question. The very same rabbis claim that the Jews had fallen to the 49th level of impurity, and had become guilty of idolatry in Egypt. Why, then, does the fact that they didn't change their names make any difference? What's in a name, if the person is a sinner? And if we are referring to the name one gives oneself through one's behavior, I could argue that they indeed did change their names! They changed them to idolatrous ones.

Rather, in the same spirit of "I Shall Be," we can gain greater insight into a name. Names do not change from day to day or year to year. A name is over a lifetime. God did not name Himself "I Am," rather, "I Shall Be." The name that we give ourselves is not based on our temporary behaviors, but on our overall life's goals and values. It's who we yearn to be, even though at the moment, we are not at that level.

Thus, when Moses asks God what the merit of the people is that will make them worthy of redemption, God answers, "When you take them out of Egypt, you will all serve the Lord on this mountain (you will receive the Torah here)." In other words, even though they are idolatrous and assimilated today, they have never changed their names, the names that reflect their dreams and hopes for the world. They are destined to stand tall at Mount Sinai! That is who they truly are.

Many people are "searching for themselves." I might only suggest that you begin that search with your names. You should look inside your heart to discover the name that God gave you, through your skills, dreams, and passion. You should look at the name that your parents gave you, your education, and, more, their aspirations for you. Based on that, you should assign yourself a name that you will achieve through your life's work.